Case Number: BC644088 Hearing Date: May 10, 2018 Dept: 5

Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Department 5

Marshall Dean,

Plaintiff,

v.

Sherman Oaks Hospital,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC644088

Hearing Date: April 26, 2018

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

defendant’S motion to Deem the Requests for Admission Admitted

Defendant Prime Healthcare Sherman Oaks Hospital, LLC dba Sherman Oaks Hospital (“Defendant”) has filed a motion to deem admitted the Requests for Admissions (“RFA”), set one.

On October 19, 2017, Defendant served the RFA on plaintiff Marshall Dean (“Plaintiff”). Plaintiff’s responses to the RFA were due on November 23, 2017. Defendant did not receive any responses. Defense counsel sent a letter to Plaintiff on February 1, 2018 and requested that Plaintiff provide the responses to the RFA within two weeks. As of the filing of the motions on March 12, 2018, Defendant had not received any responses from Plaintiff. Plaintiff did not file an opposition to Defendant’s motion.

This motion was first heard on April 26, 2018. Plaintiff testified under oath that he never received the moving papers. Plaintiff testified that he learned of the April 26, 2018 hearing date when he looked online on the Court’s website and saw that there was a hearing scheduled for April 26, 2018. Plaintiff admitted that he received the RFA, set one served in October 2017, but Plaintiff denied ever having received the instant motion. Plaintiff verified that the address shown on the proof of service for the instant motion is his current address, but Plaintiff maintains that he never received the moving papers. In open court on April 26, 2018, Defense Counsel handed Plaintiff a copy of Defendant’s motion to deem admitted the RFA, set one. The record is thus clear that as of April 26, 2018, Plaintiff was in receipt of the instant motion.

After Plaintiff received a copy of the instant motion in open court on April 26, 2018, the Court continued the motion to the instant date to allow Plaintiff time to serve verified responses and file proof of service of such no later than May 3, 2018. In doing so, the Court expressly advised “[i]f Plaintiff fails to serve verified responses to the RFA, set one before the May 10, 2018 hearing on this motion, the motion will be granted.” Nonetheless, the Court is not in receipt of any proof of service of responses to the RFA, set one.

Defendant moves under CCP §2033.280 to deem the RFA admitted. Where there has been no timely response to a request for admission under CCP § 2033.010, the propounding party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).) The party who failed to respond waives any objections to the demand, unless the court grants that party relief from the waiver, upon a showing that the party (1) has subsequently served a substantially compliant response, and (2) that the party’s failure to respond was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subds. (a)(1)-(2).) The court “shall” grant a motion to deem admitted requests for admissions, “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Despite receiving this motion in open court on April 26, 2018 and despite having been warned at that time that failure to respond to the RFA would result in the Court granting this motion, Plaintiff has not demonstrated that Plaintiff has served, before the current hearing on this motion, any response to the RFA. Nor has Plaintiff filed any opposition to Defendant’s motion to deem the RFA admitted. Accordingly, Defendant’s unopposed motion for an order deeming the RFA, set one, admitted is granted pursuant to CCP §2033.280. Plaintiff Marshall Dean is deemed to have admitted the truth of all matters specified in the RFA, set one as of this date.

Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff. The Court finds Plaintiff’s failure to respond a misuse of the discovery process. Sanctions have been sufficiently noticed against Plaintiff. The Court grants sanctions for 2.5 hours to prepare the motion and appear at the hearing, at $425.00 per hour, plus one $60 filing fee, for a total of $1,122.50. Plaintiff is ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,122.50 to Defendant, by and through counsel, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Accordingly, Defendant’s unopposed motion for an order deeming the RFA, set one, admitted is granted pursuant to CCP §2033.280. Plaintiff is ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,122.50 to Defendant, by and through counsel, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

All parties should note that the hearing on this motion and all future hearings and court dates will take place at the Court’s new location: Spring Street Courthouse, 312 N. Spring Street, Department 5, Los Angeles, CA 90012.

//

//

//

Defendant is ordered to provide notice of this order, including the Court’s new location and new department number, and file proof of service of such.